Alexandru Constantinescu, Christoper Pavel, Oana-Mihaela Plotogea, Octavian Andronic, Andreea Puscasu, Florentina Gherghiceanu, Madalina Cristina Stan-Ilie, Vasile Șandru
{"title":"超声内镜引导下胰腺恶性肿瘤组织采集:三级中心的回顾性研究。","authors":"Alexandru Constantinescu, Christoper Pavel, Oana-Mihaela Plotogea, Octavian Andronic, Andreea Puscasu, Florentina Gherghiceanu, Madalina Cristina Stan-Ilie, Vasile Șandru","doi":"10.2478/rjim-2025-0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is gaining ground in today's diagnostic routine due to its ability to provide dynamic, accurate representations, but mostly because it facilitates tissue sampling amenable to histopathologic studies. Our main objective was to assess the accuracy of sampling pancreatic malignancies through EUS-fine-needle aspiration (FNA) compared to EUS-fine-needle biopsy (FNB) at a tertiary referral center, where rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) for EUS-FNA is not available.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A retrospective, 5-year analysis of all EUS-guided tissue acquisitions of pancreatic masses suggestive of neoplasia was performed. Out of the 484 patients who initially underwent non-invasive imaging studies, 401 subjects were ultimately confirmed as malignant using EUS-FNA/FNB or surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, the accuracy of EUS-guided sampling was 91%. There were 36 patients (9%) with false-negative results after EUS, who were further addressed to surgery and confirmed with pancreatic malignancy. Cytological and histological examinations found that FNB was significantly higher than FNA regarding the diagnostic yield (91.3% vs. 84.1%; p-value<0.05). Moreover, FNB required fewer needle punctures than FNA to achieve a definitive diagnosis (1.63 vs. 1.99; p-value<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Diagnostic management of pancreatic malignancies is unequivocally improved by FNB needles, rendering an improved tissue acquisition at a lower number of passes.</p>","PeriodicalId":21463,"journal":{"name":"Romanian Journal of Internal Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Tissue Acquisition of Pancreatic Malignancy: A Retrospective Study at a Tertiary Center.\",\"authors\":\"Alexandru Constantinescu, Christoper Pavel, Oana-Mihaela Plotogea, Octavian Andronic, Andreea Puscasu, Florentina Gherghiceanu, Madalina Cristina Stan-Ilie, Vasile Șandru\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/rjim-2025-0008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is gaining ground in today's diagnostic routine due to its ability to provide dynamic, accurate representations, but mostly because it facilitates tissue sampling amenable to histopathologic studies. Our main objective was to assess the accuracy of sampling pancreatic malignancies through EUS-fine-needle aspiration (FNA) compared to EUS-fine-needle biopsy (FNB) at a tertiary referral center, where rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) for EUS-FNA is not available.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A retrospective, 5-year analysis of all EUS-guided tissue acquisitions of pancreatic masses suggestive of neoplasia was performed. Out of the 484 patients who initially underwent non-invasive imaging studies, 401 subjects were ultimately confirmed as malignant using EUS-FNA/FNB or surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, the accuracy of EUS-guided sampling was 91%. There were 36 patients (9%) with false-negative results after EUS, who were further addressed to surgery and confirmed with pancreatic malignancy. Cytological and histological examinations found that FNB was significantly higher than FNA regarding the diagnostic yield (91.3% vs. 84.1%; p-value<0.05). Moreover, FNB required fewer needle punctures than FNA to achieve a definitive diagnosis (1.63 vs. 1.99; p-value<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Diagnostic management of pancreatic malignancies is unequivocally improved by FNB needles, rendering an improved tissue acquisition at a lower number of passes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21463,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Romanian Journal of Internal Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Romanian Journal of Internal Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/rjim-2025-0008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Romanian Journal of Internal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/rjim-2025-0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:内窥镜超声(EUS)在今天的常规诊断中越来越受欢迎,因为它能够提供动态、准确的表征,但主要是因为它便于组织病理学研究的组织取样。我们的主要目的是评估通过eus -细针穿刺(FNA)与在三级转诊中心进行eus -细针活检(FNB)取样胰腺恶性肿瘤的准确性,三级转诊中心没有EUS-FNA的快速现场评估(ROSE)。材料和方法:对所有eus引导下胰腺肿块提示肿瘤形成的5年回顾性分析。在最初接受非侵入性影像学研究的484例患者中,401例患者最终通过EUS-FNA/FNB或手术确诊为恶性。结果:总体而言,eus引导采样的准确性为91%。有36例(9%)患者在EUS后出现假阴性结果,进一步进行手术并确诊为胰腺恶性肿瘤。细胞学和组织学检查发现,FNB的诊断率明显高于FNA (91.3% vs. 84.1%;结论:FNB针明显改善了胰腺恶性肿瘤的诊断管理,通过更少的次数获得了更好的组织。
Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Tissue Acquisition of Pancreatic Malignancy: A Retrospective Study at a Tertiary Center.
Background: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is gaining ground in today's diagnostic routine due to its ability to provide dynamic, accurate representations, but mostly because it facilitates tissue sampling amenable to histopathologic studies. Our main objective was to assess the accuracy of sampling pancreatic malignancies through EUS-fine-needle aspiration (FNA) compared to EUS-fine-needle biopsy (FNB) at a tertiary referral center, where rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) for EUS-FNA is not available.
Material and methods: A retrospective, 5-year analysis of all EUS-guided tissue acquisitions of pancreatic masses suggestive of neoplasia was performed. Out of the 484 patients who initially underwent non-invasive imaging studies, 401 subjects were ultimately confirmed as malignant using EUS-FNA/FNB or surgery.
Results: Overall, the accuracy of EUS-guided sampling was 91%. There were 36 patients (9%) with false-negative results after EUS, who were further addressed to surgery and confirmed with pancreatic malignancy. Cytological and histological examinations found that FNB was significantly higher than FNA regarding the diagnostic yield (91.3% vs. 84.1%; p-value<0.05). Moreover, FNB required fewer needle punctures than FNA to achieve a definitive diagnosis (1.63 vs. 1.99; p-value<0.05).
Conclusions: Diagnostic management of pancreatic malignancies is unequivocally improved by FNB needles, rendering an improved tissue acquisition at a lower number of passes.